troops in iraq, tens of thousands of them, will pack up their gear and board convoys for the journey home. >> up on the white house website, the headline reads president obama has ended the war in iraq. the white house take on this is simple. president obama promised to end u.s. troop involvement in iraq and today fulfilled that promise. in one sense it's true. here's what he said when he launched his campaign nearly four years ago. >> america, it is time to start bringing our troops home. it's time, it's time to admit that no amount of american lives can resolve the political disagreement that lies at the heart of someone else's civil war. >> now here's the president last year. >> consistent with our agreement with the iraqi government, all u.s. troops will leave by the end of next year. >> and here's mr. obama today. >> the last american soldier already cross the border out of iraq with their heads held high, proud of their success and knowing that the american people stand united in our support for our troops. >> sounds relatively simple, but keeping them honest, it leaves out a key fact one he made no mention of today. almost right up to the moment he made the announcement, american negotiators were trying to hammer out a deal with iraqi counterparts to keep a substantial troop presence in iraq. the agreement expires at the end of the year. in his nauntment today, he made no mention of that nor did he say the administration was working to renew it. we know that was the hope. here's defense secretary panetta on monday. >> we're still in negotiations with the iraqis. general austin, the ambassador continue discussions with the iraqi leaders and we're hoping ultimately that they'll be able to find an agreement here. so, at this is taken of the game, you know, i think our hope is that the negotiators can ultimately find a way to resolve this issue in terms of what are the iraqi needs and how can we best meet them once we've concluded our combat operations. >> that's what the president did not mention today. had a deal been reaches, the administration reportedly wanted to keep as many as 5,000 troops in iraq mostly as trainers because some leaders are concerned iraq can't control its own borders and air space. some wanted even more than 5,000. most of the of the gop candidates are weighing in. mitt romney slamming the president for what he called a failure to secure an orderly transition in iraq. jon huntsman and michele bachmann also criticizing the white house for not finding a way to keep troops in iraq. jessica yellin first alerted us to the president's words today. she's been talking to her sources what really led to today's announcement and joins us now. even though total withdrawal is not what the administration would have wanted politically, it probably plays well for the president. >> reporter: politically, yeah, anderson. look, there's no question that the pentagon wanted to keep some forces in iraq beyond the new year. as you say mostly for training and advising. the breakdown was the u.s. and iraq could not reach agreement on immunity, getting u.s. troops immunity from the iraqi laws into the new year. anyone who stayed. so as you heard the president say, they're all coming home now. you asked about the politics of it. the bottom line is go back to 2008. president then candidate obama ran against the iraq war. that's what distinguished him from hillary clinton. and he propsed to bring all the troops home. he said today his first words when he stood behind the podium were i have made good on a campaign promise. he also ran promising to take out terrorists and refocus away from the wars on to al qaeda. and he emphasized that he killed bin laden today. so you see the politics of this heading into a campaign year, he's emphasized that he made good on what he pledged to do as a candidate, anderson. >> republican candidates weren't critical of the president for not being able to guarantee immunity for the u.s. combat troops. republican candidates have now also come out swinging over the white house at the white house for pulling them out because they couldn't get that immunity. has the white house responded to what the republicans are now saying? >> the white house hasn't directly but the obama campaign has, and i'll tell you talking to the obama aides, i characterize their general position on this as bring it on. if they want -- if the republicans would like to make foreign policy part of this campaign, the obama team would be thrilled because they think that foreign policy is a strength for this president. they think if you add up his what they perceive as successes, taking out osama bin laden, now gadhafi, being part of that, going after al qaeda terrorists and the drone attacks, all adds up to leadership strengths that help the president. and they say contrast that with the records of the leading republican contenders, mitt romney, perry and cain who don't have the foreign policy experience. the obama campaign, anderson, also put out a statement on mitt romney that said in part "his foreign policy experience is limited to his work as a finance executive shipping american jobs overseas." meow. it's a sense of now snarky this campaign ahead will be. you know, the final point i'd make is americans aren't that interested in foreign policy right now. i'd be surprised if this really plays large in the campaign at all. >> appreciate it. the last american fatality due to hostile action came on the 29th of last month. more than 4400 americans have lost their lives in iraq since the war began. more than $700 billion spent. iraq in many ways is only a barely functioning state. whether the white house wanted this outcome, the question remains can iraq cope on its own? will the heavy price in dollars and lives be squandered by a premature pullback? time.com intelligence columnist, bob baer, and robin wright, arab affairs analyst at the woodrow wilson center, the author of "rock the cas ba, rage and rebellion across the islamic world." john, let's start with you. were you surprised by this announcement and what do you make of it? what does it mean for iraq? >> well, i think the iraqis made it inevitable by resisting any legal ground of immunity to american troops. that's self-of evident. i do think that it has very ominous implications. i think a trip wire of a few thousand american troops combat capable if not actually engaged in combat could make the difference or could have made the difference in offering a sort of stabilizing factor for iraq at a period which is going to be fundamentally unstable. i think it's worth remembering that nothing politically has been resolved in iraq. all or almost all of the sectarian gee graphic, regional, religious, political, ideological disputes that have plagued the american presence in iraq remain unresolved. without american troops there as a guarantor of at least a final degree of stability, i think you could see a descent into instability pretty quickly. >> robin, do you agree with that? why wouldn't the iraqis grant immunity to a few thousand troops? >> well, immunity is a big issue and it was a defining issue in for example bringing khomeini to power in 1963 in iran. he made immunity the biggest issue, putting himself on the map because iranians could be prosecuted for hurting or robbing americans whereas americans would be immune from any kind of prosecution for even killing an iranian. so this is an issue that resonates not only inside iraq but in terms of what iran next door wants. i don't share john's concerns in terms of how dangerous iraq is going to be with you know, just 5,000 without 5,000 american troops. the fact is the united states has enormous number of troops in the region, ships, the fifth fleet is based in bahrain. this is -- it doesn't change the dynamics all that much. iraq hasektarian problems that are reflected across the region. but i don't think this is a moment that's going to make or break what happens in iraq next. >> bob, despite the white house the way they're spinning it, there wasn't much choice, right? they wanted us out. >> there's no choice at all. it was clear three years ago the iraqis wanted us gone. this agreement was made under bush. it was inevitable they were going to not vote immunity and i think this white house is making the best out of a bad situation. but i'd like to agree with john. he's absolutely right. i don't think we're done with the civil war in iraq. and it may not be such a bad thing that they resolve their problems and we can just hope that it's limited fighting. but you know, frankly, it's time to go. we've been there too long, done what we could and let's come home. >> john, what kind of role do you see iran playing? there's a lot of concern expressed especially by republicans these days about iran now moving in to fill a vacuum in iraq. >> well, i think that's a guaranteed intervention. the iranians will do everything they can to extend their influence. of course, the equation will will change a little bit with the united states gone because their principle objective in recent years seems to have been tonl frustrate trait the american presence rather than to create a stable environment for shiite government. but i think that anybody who's worked in iraq knows if there's a limited tolerance amongst t iraqi shiites who are for the most part iraqis first shiites second for iranian intervention. there are thousands of upon thousands of iraqi shiites who fought in the iran/iraq war who will tell you that. and i think that the iranians as in so many other ways will in effect be the force for their own undoing in this. i don't think that they are going to succeed if what they want to do is create a government in baghdad. i don't think that's going to succeed. i think the problem is going to be internal dynamics which will destabilize matters rather quickly, and i think there are a lot -- not i don't think, i know there are a lot of iraqis tonight who would agree with that who will be very sorry for all of the clamor that there has been about the american occupation in the end, there will be many iraqis who will be very sorry to see the last american troops go. >> robin, can iraq secure itself? can they take care of themselves? >> no, the iraqis are not at that point that they can tear care of all their issues. compare iraq to afghanistan, for example, the iraqis are much better off than the afghans will be in the three years when the united states proposes to leave afghanistan. and i think john's right. the iranians and the iraqis that fought the grizzliest modern middle east war, the iranians are in many ways a threat to iraq in terms of their kind of aggressive promotion of whether it's really just ideology or their political system. and i think they'll be a resistance among the iraqis politically, militarily, economically, to prevent iran's influence from encroaching that much deeper than it already is. >> and bob, there's still going to be a lot of u.s. contractors over there. they will not have immunity. they will be open for prosecution if they get involved in shootings and things like that, right? >> oh, absolutely. i think we're going to be moving into a citadel until that place stabilizes. you also have to keep in mind, taking american troops out of iraq, the iranians no longer have a hostage in that will sense. and if we move toward any conflict with iran, it will be a lot easier simply because our troops won't be in striking distance. >> interesting perspective, bob baer, john burns, robin write, thank you very much. we're on facebook, follow me on twitter @anderson cooper. people weighing in on twitter. up next, late new developments out of libya and a closer look at gadhafi's final movements. this new video shows people hitting him, pummeling him about the head when he's clearly very badly wounded. what we're learning from the fighter who's captured him. and stunning revelations how steve jobs fought the cancer that ultimately killed him. why he waited nine months to have the tumor inside him removed. how he finally turned to the best science that is money could buy. why in the end it was not enough. dr. sanjay gupta explains when we continue. i'm not a number. i'm not a line item on a budget. and i'm definitely not a pushover. but i am a voter. so washington... before you even think about cutting my medicare and social security benefits... here's a number you should remember. 50 million. we are 50 million seniors who earned our benefits... and you will be hearing from us... today and on election day. ♪ today and on election day. ♪ ♪ co-signed her credit card -- "buy books, not beer!" ♪ but the second that she shut the door ♪ ♪ girl started blowing up their credit score ♪ ♪ she bought a pizza party for her whole dorm floor ♪ ♪ hundred pounds of makeup at the makeup store ♪ ♪ and a ticket down to spring break in mexico ♪ ♪ but her folks didn't know 'cause her folks didn't go ♪ ♪ to free-credit-score-dot-com hard times for daddy and mom. ♪ offer applies with enrollment in freecreditscore.com™. [ tires squeal ] an accident doesn't have to slow you down. with better car replacement, available only from liberty mutual insurance, if your car's totaled, we give you the money to buy a car that's one model-year newer with 15,000 fewer miles on it. there's no other auto insurance product like it. better car replacement, available only from liberty mutual. it's a better policy that gets you a better car. call... or visit one of our local offices today, and we'll provide the coverage you need at the right price. liberty mutual auto insurance -- responsibility. what's your policy? >> the late word tonight, fate toe is setting a preliminary end date are october 31st for operations in libya. also new video of gadhafi's son smoking a cigarette shortly before he was killed. precisely how his father came to be killed is disputed. you're going to see very grizzly stuff. we're learning more what happened in this video of fighters knocking him around, shoving him into a pickup and taking him away even though questions still remain what happened between this scene and the final scene. libya's former strongman dead on the floor in the morgue in misrata. in a moment. first what we're learning about the dictator's final moments. >> the new video shows him being marched away by revolutionary fighters after they found him hiding underneath a drainage pipe. he's beaten, shoved to the ground. his face is covered in blood. film him it, film. god is great, they're heard saying. in another video, you can see gadhafi being slapped, kicked but he says defiantly shame on you. you're sinning. you're sinning. a fighter replies you don't know about sin. the question is how he got from here clearly alive to here. dead with an apparent gunshot wound to his temple in a morgue in misrata. a soldier told "the new york times" he was bleeding from the head and chest when they found him. another fighter told reuters gadhafi had gunshot wounds in his back and legs. this is fighter says he was the one who captured the colonel. >> translator: then we went to the other side and four or five ran out from under the road and surrendered. one of them told us gadhafi was inside and wounded. when we entered the hall, i saw his bushy head and jumped on him immediately. then all the fighters came and surrounded him. >> the libyan interim government still insists gadhafi was not killed intentionally and say he was killed in cross fire between his own men and captors as he was being taken to a hospital. gadhafi was first shot in the feet and then in the head according to the interim government and later died of that head wound in the ambulance. but human rights watch in libya told cnn they're concerned his bullet wounds didn't come from cross fire, suggesting he was perhaps executed. they say they found 95 bodies at the site where gadhafi was captured and at least ten shot at point blank range. international human rights groups have asked for an investigation. >> more is coming to light as correspondents on the ground keep adding to the story. i spoke with dan rivers in in sirte and lindsay hill some who spent the day with the people who captured gadhafi. there are a lot of conflicting reports on his final moments. you spent the day with the brigade that captured gadhafi. what details were you able to glean about his final moments? >> reporter: they say they did not kill him. they say they were fighting near sirte and then realized there were people down this culvert, this drainage ditch. and they were -- they went in there and started shooting. and then some people came out who they said were mercenaries or they were black, probably africans and said we surrender, we surrender. one of them said we are injured. and i have colonel gadhafi, moammar gadhafi down here. the young man i spoke to said at that moment, he dropped his kalashnikov, shouted god is great and then jumped on top of gadhafi. that's what he told me. he said he realized it was really, really gadhafi -- he said i've never seen him face to face before. i had never seen him. and then gadhafi said what's happening, what's happening? and he said his voice sounded just the same as on television. he was obviously alive at that point, he was speaking. these men said that they took him to an ambulance, that he was injured. that he was bleeding. but they took him to an ambulance and sort of put him on the front of the vehicle and they showed me the vehicle where they said the blood was colonel gadhafi's blood. they say they don't know what happened to him after that. >> clearly in the video that we're watching right now, you see people hitting him with fists. his head is clearly bloody. people are punching him in the head and in the face. and then later, he obviously shows up dead. what do they say about those reports though that he was executed or do some still say that he was caught in cross fire, which was the story floating around yesterday? >> reporter: nobody said to me today that he was caught in cross fire. the people who i spoke to were talking about the actual capture of him, and they say they really don't know what happened to him after they put him in the ambulance. >> dan rivers, what sort of reaction today have people been telling you about what went on? >> in terms of what we've gleaned about what happened and it sort of chimes in with what lindsay is saying, we were speaking to one human rights investigator on the ground in sirte. he is fairly certain that gadhafi was not killed in the cross fire. he says that there was no reports of any shooting or fighting in that area after they caught gadhafi. i spoke to a reuters reporter here who had seen the ambulance he was put into and said there was no trace of any bullets going into that ambulance. they have seen his body in the morgue here which they say has got a gunshot wound to the head. the question is how did he get that gunshot wound to the head and it seemed it must have happened between him being taken in that video clearly still alive and at some point before he gets in that ambulance, being apparently shot in the head. >> lindsay, have you heard from anyone you talked to today in the brigade what happened to -- you said there were possibly african fighters with gadhafi. were they killed as well? >> some of them were certainly injured. it's not clear whether they were killed or not. i learned that the defense minister was also dead when they found him and one of the fighters i spoke to was wearing his watch. he had taken that off the body. i have to say that to us this may sound extremely grizzly. but here, many libyans are a little confused about why they are so worried about the manner of colonel gadhafi's death because what they say is he killed tens of thousands of people and now it's over.